Posted on 04/20/2019 4:58:42 AM PDT by Sir Napsalot
Obama-era Attorney General Eric Holder claimed Friday that any “competent” prosecutor would be able to make a successful obstruction of justice case against President Trump based on the findings outlined in special counsel Robert Mueller’s report.
“ANY competent public corruption prosecutor would bring obstruction charges against Trump/and win. Only reason Mueller did not was because of the flawed DOJ [Justice Department] restriction against indicting a sitting President. He said so (below). Congress now has a constitutional responsibility,” Holder wrote on Twitter.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Any third grader could win a Treason case against you.
All you have to do is manufacture a little evidence, right Derrick?
Why did Trump allow McGahn to testify, knowing that his testimony would be so damaging to Trump?
The answer is even more intriguing. I believe the purpose of this was to get this particular piece of information into the public domain ... because it's actually NOT damaging to Trump.
President Trump had the legal authority to fire Mueller at any time. Period. It may have been a terrible move politically, but there would have been nothing illegal about it.
A DOJ official operates as an executive branch officer, and ultimately answers only to the President. This is established under the U.S. Constitution, and under the enabling legislation for the DOJ. One of the unique features of our form of government is that we have an independent chief executive, and in recent decades one of the strongest proponents of this concept has been a guy named William Barr.
Just something for y'all to think about ...
How many congressional subpoenas did Eric Holder ignore? And he got away with it.
Obstruction for no crime? He clearly was the worst AG in history.
Holder is one of those guys who, when he was a child, some relative or unctuous family friend told he was intelligent, and unfortunately, he believed them.
Could any competent prosecutor have convicted the New Black Panthers in Philadelphia, Eric? How about Lois Lerner? Hillary Clinton?
Any competent prosecutor would have had hiLIARy and obozo both behind bars.
Oooooooo...Contempt of Congress
Sounds scary.
What did they do, give him a harsh talking to, or a stern stare???
“...because it’s actually NOT damaging to Trump.”
It is. It gives the democrats and the MSM fodder to smear Trump. And if the democrats didn’t think the smears were not hurting Trump, they would not engage in them.
Part II of the Mueller Report contains no legally actionable facts. It only serves to keep the smears coming, to make the ignorant think that it does contain something, and McGhan merely lent credence to the nonsense. The talking heads jump to give McGhan’s word more weight than Trump’s.
Super! Now he’s calling Mueller incompetent because even after 2 years he couldn’t come up with any crimes, much less prosecutable crimes...If Mueller tried to prosecute President Trump, it would open too many doors to come back and bite him so he opted to concoct a 400+ page set of lies and rabid Leftist opinions to let the Dems try to carry on...the more they try, the more cracks they will open to shine the light on them and theirs.
Barr was very calm and “kind” to Mueller but from what I have seen, he is disgusted with what Mueller did and only released the report in its mostly unredacted form because President Trump requested it...Barr wants the DOJ and it’s ancillary arms to have some sort of respect and credence and Mueller made it so the only way to do that is for Barr to start digging to get all the real facts out there...which cannot be good for Mueller and those who were depending on him.
It is the prosecutor on Mueller’s team of what McGahn said.
Only McGahn and Trump were in the room. There are always three sides to every story.
Maybe Trump is schooling Barr.
Except that A. Trump let them do stupid shit instead of stopping them, and B. There was no basis for the investigation, as being helped by foreigners we are not at war with isn’t a crime.
Watergate had an actual crime. There was a legitimate investigation into allegations of an actual crime that turned out to be true. You can have obstruction of justice regarding an investigation of a crime whether it turns out that the crime happened or not.
With “Russia, Russia, Russia” there is no actual crime even alleged. They just decided to have an investigation anyway.
I guess that rules out Holder.
This is all they have now. Pulling out all the stops to desperately establish a narrative going into 2020.
Eric Holder needs to be asked about competent prosecutors and gun running cases.
Yet Mueller, and his troop of merry Hillary supporters couldn’t pull it off. So ... ?
So what are these crimes? People keep bringing up McGahn. Trump apparently wanted him to fire Mueller. McGahn advised against it and resigned.
Neither one took any action against Mueller. Trump voicing his distain for Mueller and wanting him gone, is not obstruction. Firing Mueller may have been obstruction but that didn't happen.
Talkin' and doin' are two different things. Of all the situations listed in the Mueller report, none were overt actions to block the investigation. They were all "thought" crimes. And Holder thinks he can be prosecuted for that?
Congress impeaching Trump is a whole different story. They're after political blood and don't need a crime to charge Trump. They can just bring Articles of Impeachment against him House for just not liking him. Senate would never convict without hard evidence.
People are trying to compare BJ Clinton's impeachment with a possible Trump case. Ken Starr's report said that Clinton was guilty on 11 criminal charges, five of them obstruction of justice. Mueller doesn't allege any crimes by Trump. Apples and oranges.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.